Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Most Wicked Long Range Wildcat Debate!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="hemiford" data-source="post: 1243424" data-attributes="member: 72104"><p>I have been interested in building a 375-416 Barrett for some time.</p><p>There are posts on here over the years warning that we don't have</p><p>slow enough powders to make this wildcat really shine.</p><p></p><p>Now what I am reading is that there are cartridges larger than the</p><p>375 C-T that must surely be approaching 200-gr water capacity,</p><p>which I think is right around the 416 Barrett case.</p><p></p><p>The comparatively short-fat Barrett case "should" have a burn</p><p>advantage over the long-skinny C-T derivatives, no ?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hemiford, post: 1243424, member: 72104"] I have been interested in building a 375-416 Barrett for some time. There are posts on here over the years warning that we don't have slow enough powders to make this wildcat really shine. Now what I am reading is that there are cartridges larger than the 375 C-T that must surely be approaching 200-gr water capacity, which I think is right around the 416 Barrett case. The comparatively short-fat Barrett case "should" have a burn advantage over the long-skinny C-T derivatives, no ? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Most Wicked Long Range Wildcat Debate!
Top